- White House launches website section targeting media.
- Lists journalists and outlets accused of distortion.
- Aims to expose biased or false coverage.
"Misleading. Biased. Exposed" is written at the top of the page. The Boston Globe, CBS News, and the Independent are named as "media offenders of the week" in the article, which accuses them of misrepresenting Trump's comments regarding six Democratic senators who issued a video urging military personnel to defy unlawful orders.
Trump's social media accusations of Democrats engaging in "seditious behavior, punishable by death" sparked the debate. Additionally, he retweeted a remark that said, "hang them."
According to the site,
“The Democrats and Fake News Media subversively implied that President Trump had issued illegal orders to service members. Every order President Trump has issued has been lawful.
It is dangerous for sitting Members of Congress to incite insubordination in the United States’ military, and President Trump called for them to be held accountable.”
A "Offender Hall of Shame" featuring the Washington Post, CBS News, CNN, and MSNBC (formerly known as MS formerly) is another component of the website. A searchable database of articles and the names of the journalists who authored them is available to visitors. Labels like "bias," "malpractice," or "left wing lunacy" are applied to each article.
According to a scoreboard, the Washington Post is presently the biggest offender, followed by MSNBC and CBS News.
The US Coast Guard will no longer designate swastikas and nooses as hate symbols, according to a Washington Post piece from earlier this month. However, the Coast Guard changed its mind after the article was published.
The White House page accuses a wide range of media outlets of bias or disinformation, including the Associated Press, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, and Axios, in addition to those designated as weekly offenders.
The webpage's introduction is the most recent intensification of Trump's ongoing criticism of the media. It comes after he repeatedly referred to major news organizations as the "enemy of the people," filed lawsuits against the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, and reached settlements with ABC and CBS.
Additionally, Trump has escalated his personal attacks on female journalists in recent weeks. He called a Bloomberg News correspondent a "piggy" earlier this month.
Are there legal or ethical concerns about a government media blacklist?
A government- maintained media blacklist like the White House's" Media Offender of the Week" raises First Amendment issues in the U.S., as public review of outlets could chill defended speech if perceived as retribution or previous restraint, though pure opinion or factual disconfirmations on government websites generally repel scrutiny under cases like Miami Herald v. Tornillo( 1974).
Courts have ruled blocking critics on sanctioned social media violates free speech( Knight First Amendment Inst. v. Trump, 2019), but static websites listing contended deformations face lower bars absent access denial or compulsion.
No direct precedent exists for such a" hall of shame," but escalation to warrants or access restrictions could invite suits from outlets like CBS or CNN.